dns_list_blocked

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. Explains the hierarchical tree behavior and optional parameter, but does not disclose that it is read-only or mention potential limitations like large responses. Adequate but could be more transparent about being a safe read operation.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

Two concise sentences, front-loaded with the key purpose, no unnecessary words or repetition.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

For a tool with one optional parameter and no output schema, the description provides enough context to use it correctly: hierarchical return and drill-down. Could mention that it is read-only, but not critical for usability.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema coverage is 100% for the single parameter. Description adds value by explaining the optional nature and providing an example ('e.g. com'), clarifying the drill-down behavior beyond the schema's basic description.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

Clearly states it lists blocked DNS zones/domains with a hierarchical tree. Differentiates from siblings like dns_list_allowed and dns_block_domain by specifying 'blocked' and the drill-down behavior.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

Provides explicit instructions: 'call with no domain to see top-level zones, then pass a domain to drill into subdomains' with an example ('com'). While not explicitly stating when not to use it, the context of sibling tools makes it clear this is for reading blocked domains only.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.